Article by
Barbados Today

Published on
December 30, 2017

If the Opposition Barbados Labour Party (BLP) thinks it has heard the last from its former Christ Church West representative Dr Maria Agard, it may have another thing coming.

Mere hours after the High Court today threw out her legal challenge to her November 22, 2015 expulsion from the Opposition party on the grounds that it was improperly filed, Agard today said she was not ruling out the possibility of refiling the case.

The case brought by Dr Maria Agard (right) was struck out today on account of procedural errors to do with the manner in which it was filed by her legal team, led by Hal Gollop, QC (left).

However, she said her final decision on whether to sue the Mia Mottley-led BLP all over again, would be made in conjunction with her family and her attorneys.

Agard, who was noticeably absent from the High Court today when Justice Olson Alleyne delivered his ruling, made her position known in a three-page press release issued by attorney-at-law Lynette Eastmond, who has been assisting Queen’s Counsel Hal Gollop in fighting her case.

In his 50-page judgment, Alleyne, while dismissing the lawsuit, left the door open for it to be refiled.

“Dr Agard is still of a strong conviction that a severe and willful injustice was meted out to her by the leadership of the Barbados Labour Party. In the circumstances, she would take into account the option handed to her by the learned High Court Justice, take advice from her counsel, as well as discuss the matter with her family before making any decision on the future of this matter,” the press release said, while expressing concern about how difficult it is for working class people in Barbados “to pursue matters of natural justice in Barbados because of the costs attached to such proceedings.

Agard, a dentist by profession, and who currently sits as an independent in the House of Assembly, further suggested that “a just society should devise means of lowering these costs so access to justice would not be a privilege, but a right, especially with regard to addressing the grievous acts of abuse by figures in authority”.

In his ruling, Justice Alleyne ordered Agard to pay yet-to-be-determined costs to the attorneys representing BLP Chairman Mia Mottley and General Secretary Dr Jerome Walcott, the two defendants named in the suit.

The judge was particularly harsh in his criticisms of the way in which the Gollop-led legal team had filed their client’s claim, pointing out that it was lodged against the wrong people, on the wrong fix date claim form (FDCF) and in the wrong way.

“In considering this matter, I have taken account also that the claimant has had a second bite at the proverbial cherry. She filed an amended FDCF, albeit without leave. I have heard no submissions on it, but the record speaks for itself. That document was filed to remedy admitted defects in the FDCF. However, as counsel for the defendants submitted, it maintains many of the flaws that characterized the original document,” the presiding judge found.

“It remains the wrong mode of commencement; it does not set out a short description of the nature of the claim; it does not state in its body, the capacity in which the defendants are sued; it contains the same internal headings that are apt to confuse; and it reproduces an incoherent paragraph already the subject of complaint.

“Additionally, it invites unguided references to the claimant’s affidavit for some of its intended contents,” the judge stated.

He further suggested that his ruling to strike out Agard’s claim was more efficient than the “untidy” alternative of having her make a major overhaul of the relevant claim document, which contained substantial breaches and would require substantial amendments.

Alleyne also warned that had he gone the latter route, it would have done nothing to discourage sloppiness or encourage careful adherence to the Court Procedural Rules (CPR).

However, Agard, who has been replaced by fellow dentist Dr William Duguid as the BLP’s Christ Church West representative, may still seek to have her day in court, with the question of whether her expulsion from the BLP was in breach of natural justice yet unanswered.

In this regard, her press release today specifically pointed to Page 49 of the judgment, which said:

“Striking out the claim would not deprive the claimant of her access to the court or bestow any windfall on the defendants. The claimant may make a fresh start with these procedural flaws behind her.”

In the meantime, Mottley, who along with Dr Walcott was in court today, told reporters on the steps of the High Court complex that the BLP was happy that the two-year-old matter had come to an end.

“We have contended all along that we treated Dr Agard fairly and that the action. . . was always wrong . . . that she was suing the wrong party, in the wrong way, with the wrong document, with the wrong cause of action. The court has in fact held that this morning and described the claim form as a catalogue of errors, no less than seven,” Mottley said, while describing the matter as an unfortunate series of events.

Insisting she was glad it was now behind her, the BLP leader said it was never about who was going to be the candidate in Christ Church West since that was settled 18 months ago.

“This was simply about the membership of the Barbados Labour Party because Dr Agard never applied for a stay while this matter was being heard. So the most that could have come from this was damages.

“In any event, all that is left for us is to stay focused on what lies before the country. There is too much before Barbados now for us to be distracted,” Mottley added.

Commenting on today’s development, political scientist and pollster Peter Wickham said he never expected Agard to win the case, while contending that she could not force an organization to keep her as a member.

Wickham suggested that if she wanted to pursue a career in politics, she should go to the people on her own or join the United Progressive Party (UPP), which, incidentally, is led by Lynette Eastmond.

“She should [finish] with this court thing. It isn’t doing anything for her,” the political scientist suggested.

Mottley was represented in the case by Queen’s Counsel Leslie Haynes in association with Leslie Roberts, while Roger Forde, QC, in association with Michelle Shepherd, appeared for Dr Walcott.

Gollop, in association with Eastmond and Kara-Je Kellman, represented Agard.

They don’t call it the rough and tumble game for nuthin’.
Part art; part artifice; part science; part scheming; part scoundrelism; part glory; part gory; part gain; and part pain.
Pay de lawyer please, ’cause ‘e got to eat. Yes, plenty.

So many learned People in Barbados. Not too many can get anything done right. whether it is the sewage problem, the water problem, the pot holes problem or the financial problems.

I think we should shut down the Universety and save some money. Before we had all these educated people in Barbados seventh standard people were running thing very well. we were solving our problems and living well.!!!

So many learned People in Barbados. Not too many can get anything done right. whether it is the sewage problem, the water problem, the pot holes problem or the financial problems.
I think we should shut down the Universety and save some money. Before we had all these educated people in Barbados seventh standard people were running thing very well. we were solving our problems and living well.!!!

…but Carson C Cadogan,everybody got to wait their turn…. think that they ONLY got Hal Gollop to deal wid ?
I would ask this question ” why after 2 years those three blind mice didn’t realized that EVERYTHING they did was DEAD WRONG ? like you did want to expose the three blind mice ever since.
The High Court gave them 2 years to correct their MISTAKES ,but Gollop was more interested in MIAs legal certificate than Agards case…she should now turn round and sue he RH for NEGLECT.
The present Government should be taken to the CCJ .You are correct….the jokers around here dont seem to know what they are doing.

But something wrong here.
It took the high Court 2 years to realise that a lawsuit was filed wrong???
And then we wonder why the CCJ is always hammering the Judicial system of Barbados in particular.
The case needs to go the CCJ. The Jokers around here dont seem to know what they are doing.

…but Carson C Cadogan,everybody got to wait their turn…. think that they ONLY got Hal Gollop to deal wid ?
I would ask this question ” why after 2 years those three blind mice didn’t realized that EVERYTHING they did was DEAD WRONG ? like you did want to expose the three blind mice ever since.
The High Court gave them 2 years to correct their MISTAKES ,but Gollop was more interested in MIAs legal certificate than Agards case…she should now turn round and sue he RH for NEGLECT.
The present Government should be taken to the CCJ .You are correct….the jokers around here dont seem to know what they are doing.

Most of you here are talking a lot of foolishness.
Legal proceeding for the former Central Bank Gov. didnt go well for him and he was using a BLP Lawyer.
The Father of MIA AMOR MOTTLEY represented the former Commissioner of Police and he didnt get things to go his way either.
Chefette lost their case at the Court of Appeal.
And on and on.

….yet we must continue to “seek justice” whenever the need arises. We must continue to do so inspite of “relationships” that seek to deny us said justice, we must do so inspite of the deterrence of cost, and we must do so inspite of the deterrence of needless and deliberate complexity in the procedural process. We must continue to flood the courts no matter the road blocks. One day we will overcome.

….yet we must continue to “seek justice” whenever the need arises. We must continue to do so inspite of “relationships” that seek to deny us said justice, we must do so inspite of the deterrence of cost, and we must do so inspite of the deterrence of needless and deliberate complexity in the procedural process. We must continue to flood the courts no matter the road blocks. One day we will overcome.

@ Carson C. Cadogan
The case needs to go the CCJ. The Jokers around here dont seem to know what they are doing.
I agree with the first sentence. The second one – I believe they do know what they are doing. These deeds are done base on relationships.

Hal Gollop and Lynette Eastmond should hang their heads in shame,how could two experienced lawyers make such a legal blunder and now that Miss Agard has lost the case she now has to pay the 4 lawyers who represented the BLP and the 2 clowns who represented her. SHAMEFUL.

Hal Gollop and Lynette Eastmond should hang their heads in shame,how could two experienced lawyers make such a legal blunder and now that Miss Agard has lost the case she now has to pay the 4 lawyers who represented the BLP and the 2 clowns who represented her. SHAMEFUL.

Adrian Hinds as usual as an Election looms you return to these Blogs to try to influence people to vote for your beloved DLP,like you did in 2008 and 2013 and then disappear to your lifestyle of comfort in the USA,while the rest of us have to suffer the consequences here.What part of the judgement you cannot understand?Mr Gollop who has questioned Ms motley,s right to practise law in Barbados has fouled up big time and as a result Ms Agard now has to pay cost to Ms Mottley,s lawyers a regular occurrence in court.What has family connections etc got to do with it?Deal with the facts and stop looking for excuses and red herrings,the case was badly presented full stop

Adrian Hinds as usual as an Election looms you return to these Blogs to try to influence people to vote for your beloved DLP,like you did in 2008 and 2013 and then disappear to your lifestyle of comfort in the USA,while the rest of us have to suffer the consequences here.What part of the judgement you cannot understand?Mr Gollop who has questioned Ms motley,s right to practise law in Barbados has fouled up big time and as a result Ms Agard now has to pay cost to Ms Mottley,s lawyers a regular occurrence in court.What has family connections etc got to do with it?Deal with the facts and stop looking for excuses and red herrings,the case was badly presented full stop

This is the second court decision, that has shown how incompetent Hal Gollop is as a Lawyer. On each occasion, he either filed late or did not know the statue.
But of course this will not surprise many of you, as to the legal profession in Bim, because they are stories upon stories of many of them and incompetence,fraud, and other malfeasance that go one with impunity.

This is the second court decision, that has shown how incompetent Hal Gollop is as a Lawyer. On each occasion, he either filed late or did not know the statue.
But of course this will not surprise many of you, as to the legal profession in Bim, because they are stories upon stories of many of them and incompetence,fraud, and other malfeasance that go one with impunity.

Attorney!!! Please give the fees back to this client. You have done nothing for her. It would be the right thing to do. Even a lawyer without a Legal Certificate would have done better.
Client leave the polatics out and stick to your medical thing. you are needed in this area. HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL!!!!!!!!!